94
94
Apr 23, 2013
04/13
by
CNNW
tv
eye 94
favorite 0
quote 0
you've been hearing a lot about miranda rights. there's issue at play here that need to be clarified. we're going to read a couple of the things said from the hearing. we have the transcript. the judge said, quoting here, you have been charged with one use of a weapon often mass destruction and malicious destruction of property resulting in death. the case is being prosecuted in part by william weinreb. the maximum penalty on each count is death or imprisonment for any terms of years, or life. and there was this finding from the judge, and this one is important. quote, i find that the defendant is alert, mentally competent, and lucid. he is aware of the nature of the proceedings. okay? so that is the basis for the discussion. joined by retired superior court judge isaac borenstein in boston. he's done hospital visits over his 22 years as a judge. let us begin with the idea, confusion and frustration about miranda rights. give them right away, if you don't give them, then this prosecution is astray. what is the basic understanding o
you've been hearing a lot about miranda rights. there's issue at play here that need to be clarified. we're going to read a couple of the things said from the hearing. we have the transcript. the judge said, quoting here, you have been charged with one use of a weapon often mass destruction and malicious destruction of property resulting in death. the case is being prosecuted in part by william weinreb. the maximum penalty on each count is death or imprisonment for any terms of years, or life....
155
155
Apr 23, 2013
04/13
by
CNNW
tv
eye 155
favorite 0
quote 0
he's been given his miranda warnings and probably anything he said without his miranda warnings is not going to be needed by the government or the prosecution. remember, they did not indict him as a terrorist, that's very important. they indicted him as an ordinary murderer, anybody who wants to kill their mother-in-law, business partner and makes an improvised explosive device and kills them is just as guilty under the statute indicted as osama bin laden might be. this is not a terrorist prosecution. they don't have to prove intent to terrorize, intent to intimidate. they can prove their case just through the videotapes. now, i predict there are going to be two types of possible defenses in this case. number one, the jihad defense. i did it, i'm proud, i'm happy, please kill me, i want to join my brother in paradise. i'm a martyr. the other, my brother made me do it, i am innocent, look at my face, look at my high school record, i really didn't mean it, don't give me the death penalty. i think from what we have heard now, the jihad defense seems like it is off the table. he is prepare
he's been given his miranda warnings and probably anything he said without his miranda warnings is not going to be needed by the government or the prosecution. remember, they did not indict him as a terrorist, that's very important. they indicted him as an ordinary murderer, anybody who wants to kill their mother-in-law, business partner and makes an improvised explosive device and kills them is just as guilty under the statute indicted as osama bin laden might be. this is not a terrorist...
149
149
Apr 21, 2013
04/13
by
CNNW
tv
eye 149
favorite 0
quote 0
if they don't read him his miranda rights right away, you okay with that? >> well, look. i think the public safety exception is being greatly and overly expanded in this instance. the public safety exception as the supreme court laid out is for an instance when an officer walks up on a situation and sees an empty holster and says where's your gun. that's to prevent an imminent threat from happening right then. what they are doing now is really expanding that public safety exception to say really the fifth amendment applies when they say it does and i don't think the supreme court is going to uphold that down the line. the supreme court actually heard oral argument on a case very similar out of texas last week where their argument was the fifth amendment doesn't apply until we read the miranda rights. so we may have an answer to that sooner than we think. >> christopher -- >> would it make any difference -- i'm sorry, fred. just want a little follow-up. would it make any difference if the u.s. were to revoke his naturalized u.s. citizenship as far as the law is concerned?
if they don't read him his miranda rights right away, you okay with that? >> well, look. i think the public safety exception is being greatly and overly expanded in this instance. the public safety exception as the supreme court laid out is for an instance when an officer walks up on a situation and sees an empty holster and says where's your gun. that's to prevent an imminent threat from happening right then. what they are doing now is really expanding that public safety exception to say...
99
99
Apr 21, 2013
04/13
by
CNNW
tv
eye 99
favorite 0
quote 0
the united states attorney's office advised us not to administer miranda rights. we gave that information out to our officers and i think all law enforcement was operating under those rules of engagement. >> back to the apartment real quickly. there were devices found in the apartment but you can't comment on what? >> no, i didn't say that. i can't comment on any evidence that was found there. sglp anything that was found in the apartment. are you confident that these two were acting alone and that there are no more suspects out there? >> i'm confident that they were the two major actors in the violence that occurred. i am very, very sure that during this thorough investigation we'll get to the bottom of the whole plot. that's all i can say right now. i told the people of boston that they can rest easily. the two people who were committing these vicious attacks are either dead or in custody. we cleared dozens of packages that had been dropped by people fleeing the scene. so everything was treated suspiciously. in a situation like this, bombers often target first r
the united states attorney's office advised us not to administer miranda rights. we gave that information out to our officers and i think all law enforcement was operating under those rules of engagement. >> back to the apartment real quickly. there were devices found in the apartment but you can't comment on what? >> no, i didn't say that. i can't comment on any evidence that was found there. sglp anything that was found in the apartment. are you confident that these two were...
155
155
Apr 17, 2013
04/13
by
CNNW
tv
eye 155
favorite 0
quote 0
obviously they're going to question this suspect, they'll read the miranda rights and all of that. they're going to try to find out if this individual who has now been arrested acted alone as a so-called lone wolf or was part of some broader conspiracy, walk us through what the fbi is about to do. >> sure. well, wolf, they will -- they will take him into custody, they will give him his miranda rights because they want to be sure any statement the individual may make is admissible in court during the prosecution. if the individual agrees to talk, there will be -- they will take a statement and they will also likely confront him with forensic evidence and things that they have learned, photographs, they will ask him to identify how he constructed the bomb, how he knew to construct the bomb, who, if anyone, he worked with, who he communicated with, they'll want to -- they will want to make sure to take when he's arrested any cell phones, blackberries, pocket litter, pieces of paper, notebooks he may have on him and they'll want to have him retrace for them his steps. they will then se
obviously they're going to question this suspect, they'll read the miranda rights and all of that. they're going to try to find out if this individual who has now been arrested acted alone as a so-called lone wolf or was part of some broader conspiracy, walk us through what the fbi is about to do. >> sure. well, wolf, they will -- they will take him into custody, they will give him his miranda rights because they want to be sure any statement the individual may make is admissible in court...
138
138
Apr 22, 2013
04/13
by
CNNW
tv
eye 138
favorite 0
quote 0
the argument i guess is under this limited questioning period before he is formally advised of his miranda rights, he has and right to an attorney, doesn't have to answer any questions. there has been some suggestion that can only last maybe 48 hours or so if he's formally named an enemy combatant, that would go on for days if not weeks. i guess that's the distinction. >> it's the length of time. right. the enemy combatant, if that designation were made, could go on for weeks or even months. but i just think it's important to emphasize that the obama administration has absolutely not considered that, has not considered that approach, and every terrorism suspect under either the george w. bush administration or the obama administration who was arrested on american soil has been treated as a criminal defendant in the united states courts. senator graham's proposal would an complete departure from that approach and i don't think there's any indication that's going to happen.that approach a there's any indication that's going to happen. >> and he's a naturalized u.s. citizen. only 19. but last
the argument i guess is under this limited questioning period before he is formally advised of his miranda rights, he has and right to an attorney, doesn't have to answer any questions. there has been some suggestion that can only last maybe 48 hours or so if he's formally named an enemy combatant, that would go on for days if not weeks. i guess that's the distinction. >> it's the length of time. right. the enemy combatant, if that designation were made, could go on for weeks or even...
192
192
Apr 23, 2013
04/13
by
CNNW
tv
eye 192
favorite 0
quote 0
all of this is moot right now, because as you know, yesterday, he was formally given his miranda rights and a judge magistrate at his bed side with a court-appointed attorney, a public defender. this is moot as the obama administration has made its decision. is lindsey graham on sound legal ground, saying he should be tried in a civilian court, but held and questioned as an enemy combatant? >> i think the only fair answer to that question is we don't know. because it's never been done before in american history to have some sort of hybrid combatant and criminal proceeding. we do know from jake tapper's reporting, there was an interrogation of tsavraev. and he did disclose his position that there was no broader conspiracy here. just him and his pressure. it seems like the justice department and the fbi have done the kind of interrogation that at least -- that lindsey graham seems to want to have been done, perhaps not as extensive as it might have been. but there was a premiranda interrogation and authorities can work with that, at least now going forward. >> i think that's a fair point.
all of this is moot right now, because as you know, yesterday, he was formally given his miranda rights and a judge magistrate at his bed side with a court-appointed attorney, a public defender. this is moot as the obama administration has made its decision. is lindsey graham on sound legal ground, saying he should be tried in a civilian court, but held and questioned as an enemy combatant? >> i think the only fair answer to that question is we don't know. because it's never been done...